Skoda Auto India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT, Aurangabad

30 SOT 319Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#4496 most cited

What is Skoda Auto India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT, Aurangabad authority for?

The Tribunal may allow adjustments for differences between the tested party and comparable companies to eliminate material differences, provided accurate and credible evidence is furnished.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Skoda Auto India Pvt Ltd v ACIT · 30 SOT 319 · ITAT · transfer pricing adjustment · working capital adjustment · specified domestic transaction · tested party · transactional net margin method · comparable companies · most appropriate method · associated enterprises · TNMM · section 92c · section 92ca

Issues it is cited on

section 92c(2)working capital adjustmentspecified domestic transactiontested partytransactional net margin methodcomparable companiesmost appropriate methodassociated enterprisestransfer pricing adjustmenttnmmsection 92casection 92c

Judgments citing Skoda Auto India (P) Ltd. v. ACIT, Aurangabad

Cornell Overseas P Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result Ground No 4 of the additional grounds raised by the appellant is allowed

ITA 1158/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishicornell Overseas P Ltd, Dcit, C-1, Panchsheel Enclave, Circle-3(1), Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan:Aaacc0034F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Mrs. Vandana Bhandari, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Raj, Sr. DR
Section 143

…er total income as compared to average consumption of 54% in the past 3 years. This itself shows that the assessee has incurred abnormal cost. He further referred to the decision of Skoda auto India private limited versus assistant Commissioner of income tax [30 SOT 319 (Pune)] wherein it was held that extraordinary circumstances beyond the assessee’s control are required to be eliminated for the purpose of computing the PLI. He further referred to the decision of the assistant Commissioner of income tax versus Fiat India private limited (2010 – TII – 30 – ITAT – MUM– TP). He referred to the commentary of OECD Tr…

M/S. G4S Security Services (India) Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1540/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Bhutani, AdvFor Respondent: shri Neeraj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 37(1)Section 92C

…evel out the functional difference. Ld. A.R. has placed reliance upon the following decisions which are as under: i) Qual Core Logic Lt. Vs DCIT 52 SOT 574 (Hyd.) ii) Schefenacker Motherson Ltd. Vs ITO 123 TTJ 509 (Del.) iii) Skoda Auto India (P) Ltd. Vs ACIT 30 SOT 319 (Pune) iv) Sony India (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT 114 ITD 448 (Del.) v) E-Gain Communications (P) Ltd. Vs ITO 23 SOT 385 (Pune) 10 I.T.A.No..1540/Del/2012 vi) Mentor Graphics (Noida) Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT 109 ITD 101 (Del.) 9.4 In view of above and respectfully following the ratio laid down by the above decisions of Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, we are of…

M/S Abott Medical Optics Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1116/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri Eric Mehta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri P.Chandrashekar, CIT (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234D

…al years of the distribution operation and therefore there is 10 IT(T.P) A No.1116/Bang/2011 exceptional expenses on account of advertisement, marketing and sales promotion. In support of his contention he has relied upon Skoda Auto India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 30 SOT 319 (Pune - Tribunal). 11. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative has relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 12. Having considered the rival submissions and relevant material on record, we note that there is no dispute on the fact that the assessment under consideration is the initial years of the distribution activity…

Doowon Automotive Systems India Private Limited, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1016/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1016/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S Doowon Automotive Systems India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Plot No.B-19 & 20, Sipcot V. Income Tax, Industrial Park, Oragadam, Corporate Circle – 1(1), Sriperumbudur Taluk, Chennai - 600 034. Kancheepuram District-602 105. Pan : Aaccd 4172 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. S.P. Chidambaram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Vijayalakshmi, CIT

…rofit Level Indicator needs to be adjusted in order to neutralize the comparison with the comparable companies which are in the business for more than a decade. 5 I.T.A. No.1016/Mds/15 5. Referring to Rule 10B of Income-tax Rules, 1962, the v. ACIT (2009) 30 SOT 319, the Ld.counsel submitted that the business model of the assessee has to be taken into consideration while comparing the comparable companies. The Pune Bench did not agree with the Transfer Pricing Officer that every time the assessee pays higher import duty, it must be passed on the customers or it must be adjusted for in negotiating the purcha…

E.I. Dupont India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4774/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2016AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Ajit Tolani, AdvFor Respondent: S/Shri Anand Kumar Kedia &

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “I-2” NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI L.P. SAHU Assessment Year: 2007-08 E.I. DuPont India Pvt. Ltd., vs. Deputy CIT, 7th Floor, Tower-C, DLF Cyber Greens, Circle-11(1), Sector 25A, DLF City, Phase-III, New Delhi. Gurgaon. (PAN: AAACE2462E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Deputy CIT, vs. E.I. DuPont India Pvt. Ltd., 7th Floor, Tower-C, DLF Cyber Circle-11(1), New Delhi. Greens, Sector 25A, DLF City, Phase-III, Gurgaon. (PAN: AAACE2462E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Ajit Tolani, Adv. Department by: S/Shri Anand Kumar Kedi…

Marico Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl.C.I.T. RG. 9(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8858/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala and Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Chand-CIT
Section 254(1)

…oyalty was paid to MBL since 2001,that in all the earlier years the TPO had allowed the royalty payment without any adjustment.He relied upon the cases of Akzo Noble Chemicals Ltd. (1477/PN/2010);Tech Mahindra Ltd.(12taxmann.com132),Skoda Auto India Pvt. Ltd.(30 SOT 319). 5.1.Regarding the interest issue,the AR stated that the rate for LIBOR for the period 1/04/2006 to 35/03/2007 was 5.29%,that the assessee had charged interest at the rate of 6% which was higher than the LIBOR rate. He relied upon the cases of Tata Autocomp Systems Ltd.(ITA 1320 of 2012 of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court),Siva Industries and Holdi…